Third Eye Blind, Inc. v. Near North Entertainment Insurance Services, LLC

Good Law
127 Cal. App. 4th 1311·2005 Cal. App. LEXIS 494·2005 Daily Journal DAR 3686·26 Cal. Rptr. 3d 452·2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2739
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 29, 2005A102803California5,510 words

Opinion

Opinion

McGUINESS, J.

When an insured sues its insurer for coverage and also brings negligence claims against its business manager and insurance broker for failing to advise about a policy exemption and failing to obtain additional coverage, are the negligence claims barred as a matter of law if the court rules in the insured’s favor on the coverage claim? In this case, after the trial court concluded on a motion for summary adjudication that an insurer breached its duty to defend appellants, respondents filed motions for judgment on the pleadings arguing this ruling negated appellants’ negligence claims against them as a matter of law. The trial court agreed and granted the motions without leave to amend, and appellants dispute this ruling on appeal. We conclude the judgment must be reversed because the prior order did not negate an element of the causes of action alleged against respondents. We also conclude attorney fees appellants incurred in pursuing coverage are a recoverable item of damages in their claims against respondents.

BACKGROUND

Appellants are members and associated corporate entities of the musical performance group Third Eye Blind. During the relevant time period,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.